hinaichigo Xaris Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 HelloI am renting houses, I have a resident who puts many textures (almost 10) in his walls showing child pornography "drawings".The SL TOS talks about "Child avatars", and contents like photos, but, what about drawings?Its ok if i let him? do i must report him? there are any TOS about child pornography contents to quote?Thank you for your help! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashy Calcutt Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 I guess it Depends on the State Law where He's from or country and LL's TOS.. Since its not a real person but also if the drawings look under the age 18 than i would ask him to remove them if not then leave them be.. but its a very Grey area Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bree Giffen Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 I would just file a report without confronting them (just in case they're the type to come back with a new avatar to annoy you). Reporting someone doesn't automatically get them banned. Someone who works for LL will come out to make a judgement and do what is appropriate. They might ban or they might not. Definitely be the first person to make the report so that all the facts are reported correctly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Thibodeaux Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 Report it. Let Linden Labs make the final call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amethyst Jetaime Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 Definitely report it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perrie Juran Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 In the clarification of the policy 'graphic depictions' are prohibited. In some countries even cartoon portrayals are illegal http://community.secondlife.com/t5/Features/Clarification-of-Policy-Disallowing-quot-Ageplay-quot/ba-p/599068 Let LL sort it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LlazarusLlong Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 Out of interest, why are you sneaking around looking inside this person's house? You may be their landlord, but presumably they haven't asked you to fix a leaky faucet or anything. Or does your rentals contract have a "Peeping Tom" clause allowing you to spy on them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikka Luik Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 File an AR - let the Lab make the call on this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imnotgoing Sideways Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 LlazarusLlong wrote: Out of interest, why are you sneaking around looking inside this person's house? You may be their landlord, but presumably they haven't asked you to fix a leaky faucet or anything. Or does your rentals contract have a "Peeping Tom" clause allowing you to spy on them? Linden Lab's content guidelines are very vague at this point. Possibly intentionally so. This is highly likely due to the "wild west" nature that open virtural worlds still have. The ownership model is by far incomprarble to real world situations. As a land "owner", a person is actually holding limited license to access server space hosted by Linden Lab. So, at the end of the day, the Lab has total and final say over what can and can't be done in any given situation. (=_=) With that in mind, a SL land owner better be clearly aware of TOS violations committed on their land. When faced with someone commiting a violation on their land, there is a chance that they're held complicit by the Lab and could lead to bans all around. I, as a land owner, would surely NOT want to lose my account due to someone ripping up the rules and going into potentially illegal territory. (>_<) In Second Life, a house is not a house. Walls are not solid. Cameras can go anywhere. Privacy is not the default. Every tenant is a potential meth lab with the garage door open. If it were my house, you'd be darned skippy I'd want to be aware of what's going on in there. (=_=)y As for OP, go with what the others have said. An AR is by no means a conviction. It's only a catalyst for the Lab to look into potential violations of their own policy. If they find things to be in order according to their words, they will not take action. Otherwise, they will enforce the TOS as written. As someone who is consistently a target of false ARs, I can generally much vouch for that. =^-^= Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muletta Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 I think it's odd that you prefer to peck on the landlord here, instead of dealing with such a serious topic like child pornography. A landlord does not have to sneak around and spy to see what tenants have rezzed. We are actually sometimes invited inside the tenants houses for a visit, or there are things that just require a helping hand regarding the lease, and we have to enter the rented home. And to the OP: As a landlord, I would immediately ask the tenant to remove anything that can relate to children and porn in context. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LlazarusLlong Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 Muletta wrote: I think it's odd that you prefer to peck on the landlord here, instead of dealing with such a serious topic like child pornography. Sorry, I didn't realise that an expert on morality was patrolling the forums. Since you are here, perhaps you would like to rank these in order of importance. A. Murder of a stranger. B. Husband beating. C. Mistreatment of animals. D. Exceeding the speed limit on an empty dry road with good visibility with no other car within 10 miles. E. Flashing a blind woman. F. Genocide, but only of a small ethnic group in an insignificant Balkan country.. G. Cheating at cards. H. Wife beating. Perhaps you could illuminate our lives further and suggest appropriate punishments for each "crime", indicating the length of jail sentences, community service, thrashings or tickling with a feather. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muletta Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 Llazaruslong, I think children-porn is one of the worst crimes you can commit...Much more worse, than a landlord who accidently discovers what a tenant has in his/her home. And I am sorry, that you really need to call me an expert on morality who is patrolling the forums, just because of this opinion of mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LlazarusLlong Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 OK, if you refuse to extend your condescension to issues which perhaps your limited cognitive capability is incapable of addressing - perhaps the ladies who lunch with you have never really given much thought to deep issues such as I listed - perhaps you might find a simpler question easier to be dogmatic about? Who is most deserving of disapprobation? 1. Those who start threads in the wrong forum, using General Discussions instead of Answers for obvious questions? 2. Those who encourage such behaviour by answering such queries here, rather than redirecting them? 3. Those who criticise participants who enlarge the faux discussion from its bathetic "climax"? Go on, you can surely attempt a response to that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muletta Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 What do you think about the topic here, LlazarusLlong, what are your thoughts about child-porn? - I find that much more interesting than whom I am having lunch with...Until now, you haven't said a single word concerning the topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LlazarusLlong Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 Do you always answer questions you won't, or can't answer with another question? This is NOT the Answers section! An OP here is an invitation to other participants to offer opinions, scorn and diversion. Particularly when the initial post is moron-fodder, as was the case in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muletta Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 Does this reply mean, that your opinion about child-porn is a deep secret? Okay...I will stop asking then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LlazarusLlong Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 Muletta wrote: Does this reply mean, that your opinion about child-porn is a deep secret? Okay...I will stop asking then My opinion on child pornography is expensively bought, and not to be wasted publicly on trivial questions raised by people who should know better. But here's another one for you: would you consider it child pornography if this original did not have the lower halves of their bodies blocked out by Catholic censors? And is that a crime against art? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proletarian Venus Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 My goodness, people here will fight over anything! OP, I think to be on the safe side you should report it. If it's on your land you have a right to change the rules, ban or report to LindenLabs anything you want. People have hundreds of thousands of years of gut instinct to sniff out any number of creeps. If something feels off there is a good chance it is. Once this situation is dealt with I'd put a pop-up chat message or notecard that clearly states there are to be NO sexually ambiguous child related content on your land, especially not near windows without curtains. It's your land, you get to play dictator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hinaichigo Xaris Posted March 12, 2015 Author Share Posted March 12, 2015 Thank you all for your answers! I think i need to clarify some polemic points: The drawings contain 5 or less years old furry childs having explicit sex, if you want i can take an snapshot, but I must warn you, they are really gross. The drawings are made by the resident renting the house. He showed us his drawings on the sim lobby, i'm not spying, he sent me some of these drawings, I warned him about them, but he said its "art". I going to report him as you said, you are right, Linden Labs going to decide Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Six Igaly Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Ah, it's puppy porn.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LlazarusLlong Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 hinaichigo Xaris wrote: The drawings contain 5 or less years old furry childs having explicit sex How can you tell they are less than 5 years old if they are furries? Are you an expert on arcane fantasy character life-cycles and maturity? They might be at the peak of their sexual prowess, and at the optimal time for mating and reproduction. Also, if, as has been widely suggested, time in SL passes at twelve times the norm, that would mean the images actually portray near-geriatric congress. Now, that's a big "ewwwww" from me, but wouldn't be illegal in most civilised countries. Would you - or anyone else - have a problem if it was a couple of sad cats copulating, or two canines doing it doggy? Pass me a cup of tea; I'd like to check the weather. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muletta Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 LlazarusLlong wrote: Muletta wrote: Does this reply mean, that your opinion about child-porn is a deep secret? Okay...I will stop asking then My opinion on child pornography is expensively bought, and not to be wasted publicly on trivial questions raised by people who should know better. ...and so is your opinion about the originally topic in this thread too, apparently. But here's another one for you: would you consider it child pornography if this original did not have the lower halves of their bodies blocked out by Catholic censors? Nope. And is that a crime against art? There does not exist an objective concept as a crime against art, so I cannot answer this question, sorry... :matte-motes-wink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LlazarusLlong Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Muletta wrote: LlazarusLlong wrote: My opinion on child pornography is expensively bought, and not to be wasted publicly on trivial questions raised by people who should know better. ...and so is your opinion about the originally topic in this thread too, apparently. Erm, child pornography actually IS the original topic in this thread . . . Muletta wrote: LlazarusLlong wrote: But here's another one for you: would you consider it child pornography if this original did not have the lower halves of their bodies blocked out by Catholic censors? Nope. So you have dual standards, believing at one and the same time, that some images which portray naked children are pornography, and some aren't. [And you haven't even seen the images described by the op, so you are making an ignorant judgment call!] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LlazarusLlong Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Muletta wrote: LlazarusLlong wrote: And is that a crime against art? There does not exist an objective concept as a crime against art, so I cannot answer this question, sorry... : Erm, this is a General Discussion forum, not Answers, and clear-cut definitively factual responses are not necessarily required, but the expression of a cogently argued opinions is welcomed - even if, in your case, it may be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muletta Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 LlazarusLlong wrote: Erm, child pornography actually IS the original topic in this thread . . . No it isn’t. The topic is actually, what the landlord should do about having seen some drawings from a tenant, which look like child porn in the eyes of the landlord. So you have dual standards, believing at one and the same time, that some images which portray naked children are pornography, and some aren't. Yes I have. I consider some pictures/drawings of naked children to look pornography, while other drawings for me seem not phornography. Don’t you? [And you haven't even seen the images described by the op, so you are making an ignorant judgment call!] I haven’t seen the images described by the OP, right…and that is why, I haven’t actually adviced the landlord to AR or report to LL. I have only suggested, that the OP asks the tenant to remove all drawings, that the OP finds improper to have on his/her land. Erm, this is a General Discussion forum, not Answers, and clear-cut definitively factual responses are not necessarily required, but the expression of a cogently argued opinions is welcomed - even if, in your case, it may be wrong. Okay, fair enough. In that case, I find the technique of the artist very good, and I do not think the painting is a crime against art…but only a crime to how I think, real angels look like. :matte-motes-smile: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
Recommended Posts
Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now